Why are we allowed to assume they didn't make the decision lightly but not able to assume just maybe it is extremely unlikely they have credible evidence of guilt.
You play the "oh I don't know anything game" while simultaneously saying we should assume your viewpoint. Clearly you do think you know something and the know-nothing defense is some kind of Schrodinger's cat scenario where you know something when it's time to make assumptions and don't know when someone else does.
>Why are we allowed to assume they didn't make the decision lightly
Because they're potentially shooting their cash cow and probably the most popular show they've ever had in the head. If you don't believe in their values than at least believe that they are 100% considering the financial implications of doing this.
You play the "oh I don't know anything game" while simultaneously saying we should assume your viewpoint. Clearly you do think you know something and the know-nothing defense is some kind of Schrodinger's cat scenario where you know something when it's time to make assumptions and don't know when someone else does.